Hunting - sport, food, enjoyment, cruelty?

[Wind Song]

People who kill animals for sport are called hunters.

[logroller]

People who kill animals for sport are called hunters.
Animals killed for sport are called game. :thumb:

[Wind Song]

Animals killed for sport are called game. :thumb:
My point is that hunters kill for enjoyment.

[Mr. P]

Animals killed for sport are called game. :thumb:

Game on..tis part of conservation. But again another subject.

[revelarts]

Animals killed for sport are called game. :thumb:

Animals killed for sport are called tasty with gravy and biscuits. :2up:


but DMP's story is just wrong and there have been studies that show, if i remember,

That a common trait of serial killers is that they tortured and killed domestic and small animals for fun as children.

The opposite is not of course true that everyone who has done the same WILL be serial killers of course.
buuut they are more likely, just sayin.

[jimnyc]

People who kill animals for sport are called hunters.

Some that kill for sport do so with the larger populated animals, like deer for example. If they're going to eat what they kill, or give it away to be eaten - then it's a big difference than killing a kitten for no reason.

[darin]

Some that kill for sport do so with the larger populated animals, like deer for example. If they're going to eat what they kill, or give it away to be eaten - then it's a big difference than killing a kitten for no reason.

Dude - she wants to bitch about things because she's an attention whore. Nothing you can say will prevent her from CHANGING THE FUCKING TOPIC again. Topic was: Guys killed kittens for shits and giggles. She jumps in to change it to 'all hunting is bad'. We're taking her bait. She's a troll. :(

[Wind Song]

Some that kill for sport do so with the larger populated animals, like deer for example. If they're going to eat what they kill, or give it away to be eaten - then it's a big difference than killing a kitten for no reason.

There isn't much difference between killing for the fun of it, and killing for sport, which is for the fun of it.

The motivation with killing for the fun of it may be intentional cruelty wherease killing for sport is killing for pride.

Crappy motivations both of them.

"We hunt for the thrill of the chase, and the ecstatic peace that comes with being out there trying to beat a wild animal at his own game. When the chance finally comes, there is no doubt; we will kill."
http://hunting.about.com/od/hunting/a/aa122299.htm

[jimnyc]

There isn't much difference between killing for the fun of it, and killing for sport, which is for the fun of it.

The motivation with killing for the fun of it may be intentional cruelty wherease killing for sport is killing for pride.

Crappy motivations both of them.

"We hunt for the thrill of the chase, and the ecstatic peace that comes with being out there trying to beat a wild animal at his own game. When the chance finally comes, there is no doubt; we will kill."
http://hunting.about.com/od/hunting/a/aa122299.htm

From back in the caveman days, man has hunted for meat in order to survive. The same holds true to an extent today, although one can go to a local butcher or grocery store without the hunting. But how do you think the meat gets to the butcher or grocery store? Do you prefer a man who hunts and eats what he kills, or a farm that has thousands of cows, pigs, ducks... and slaughters them for the masses?

[Wind Song]

From back in the caveman days, man has hunted for meat in order to survive. The same holds true to an extent today, although one can go to a local butcher or grocery store without the hunting. But how do you think the meat gets to the butcher or grocery store? Do you prefer a man who hunts and eats what he kills, or a farm that has thousands of cows, pigs, ducks... and slaughters them for the masses?


Oddly enough, Buddhists are allowed to eat meat but not to kill the animal for personal greed.

My point about the hunting versus torture of animals is that neither motivation is pure.

[jimnyc]

Dude - she wants to bitch about things because she's an attention whore. Nothing you can say will prevent her from CHANGING THE FUCKING TOPIC again. Topic was: Guys killed kittens for shits and giggles. She jumps in to change it to 'all hunting is bad'. We're taking her bait. She's a troll. :(

My bad, and I agree - it should stay on topic. I'm just as bad... I was trying to point out that what these assholes did to domesticated animals is a far cry from hunters going after prey. You'll never stop hunting - but I would love to be able to somewhat stop idiots like this, by increasing fines and sentences for those involved in animal cruelty.

[jimnyc]

Oddly enough, Buddhists are allowed to eat meat but not to kill the animal for personal greed.

My point about the hunting versus torture of animals is that neither motivation is pure.

kill to eat = pure

kill for fun = evil

[Wind Song]

My bad, and I agree - it should stay on topic. I'm just as bad... I was trying to point out that what these assholes did to domesticated animals is a far cry from hunters going after prey. You'll never stop hunting - but I would love to be able to somewhat stop idiots like this, by increasing fines and sentences for those involved in animal cruelty.
What these people do to torture animals is not the same as hunting. But hunting motivation is pride and greed versus torture motivation is hatred and cruelty.

[jimnyc]

What these people do to torture animals is not the same as hunting. But hunting motivation is pride and greed versus torture motivation is hatred and cruelty.

What's the motivation in a slaughterhourse? Do you take issue with them, when they kill probably millions upon millions of animals per year?

[Wind Song]

kill to eat = pure

kill for fun = evil
Kill to eat= motivation, greed, hunger

Kill for fun= hunting for sport, motivation pride, ignorance

[jimnyc]

Care to answer the question in my last post?

[Mr. P]

Kill to eat= motivation, greed, hunger

Kill for fun= hunting for sport, motivation pride, ignorance

If you believe that yer an IDIOT and don't know shit about hunting, fishing or wildlife conservation for that matter, just sayin.

[jimnyc]

New thread - split from the animal cruelty thread as it veered way off topic...

[Wind Song]

If you believe that yer an IDIOT and don't know shit about hunting, fishing or wildlife conservation for that matter, just sayin.
No, it's a Buddhist view.

It's not wildlife conservation. I used to enjoy fishing before I became a Buddhist. I never liked killing though. Some hunters kill because they get off on killing. They do it for pride.

[Wind Song]

What's the motivation in a slaughterhourse? Do you take issue with them, when they kill probably millions upon millions of animals per year?

Greed.

The motivation is profit.

[jimnyc]

Greed.

The motivation is profit.

So I'm assuming that you despise slaughterhouses, butchers and the like more so than hunters? Are you a vegan I assume?

[jimnyc]

Greed.

The motivation is profit.

Is it possible the "demand" has something to do with this, that perhaps people need to eat?

[Wind Song]

Is it possible the "demand" has something to do with this, that perhaps people need to eat?
People need to eat, of course. From a Buddhist perspective, you cannot even be a vegetarian without killing beings. Many insects are killed during harvest.

It's just a karma thang. And an interdependence issue. Everything we eat, we owe a debt to others for.

[jimnyc]

People need to eat, of course. From a Buddhist perspective, you cannot even be a vegetarian without killing beings. Many insects are killed during harvest.

It's just a karma thang. And an interdependence issue. Everything we eat, we owe a debt to others for.

So this all comes down to a Buddhist thing? What if I told you what you ate was wrong, because of my religion? No offense, that's dumb. We are meat eaters, we're designed to eat meat. I respect vegetarians though, so long as they don't try and tell me what "I" eat is wrong.

[Wind Song]

So this all comes down to a Buddhist thing? What if I told you what you ate was wrong, because of my religion? No offense, that's dumb. We are meat eaters, we're designed to eat meat. I respect vegetarians though, so long as they don't try and tell me what "I" eat is wrong.
First of all, I'm not telling you what you eat is wrong. Second, I eat meat. What I don't do, is have someone specifically kill an animal or a fish for ME. It puts me in an awkward position, in that if someone gifted me a fish he caught for ME I couldn't eat it.

I am one of those people who cannot be a vegetarian. I've tried. I feel better when I eat meat once or twice a week. The same is true for the Dalai Lama. What it means for him, as a monk, is that he incurs karma of meat eating a couple times a week.

If you're not a Buddhist, it doesn't matter so much. I know it doesn't make so much sense. Believe me, I've debated these issues with my Buddhist teachers for years.

[Mr. P]

No, it's a Buddhist view.

It's not wildlife conservation. I used to enjoy fishing before I became a Buddhist. I never liked killing though. Some hunters kill because they get off on killing. They do it for pride.

Yes, it is conservation. Those who kill for pride do exist and they are MORONS, IMO, but they are few in the millions of hunters and fisherman in this country.

You are attacking the millions that don't hunt simply for pride but for other useful and productive reasons.

[Wind Song]

Yes, it is conservation. Those who kill for pride do exist and they are MORONS, IMO, but they are few in the millions of hunters and fisherman in this country.

You are attacking the millions that don't hunt simply for pride but for other useful and productive reasons.

Please show me the post I've written that you think "attacks" hunters. I'm not saying ALL hunters kill for pride. I'm saying you either hunt for hunger, (which is greed, desire), or for pride.

Some hunters are very mindful of taking a life and they regret doing so even if they have to kill to eat.

It's a consciousness issue.

[Little-Acorn]

My point is that hunters kill for enjoyment.

People who complain about hunters are called whiners. They complain because they enjoy complaining.

[Wind Song]

People who complain about hunters are called whiners. They complain because they enjoy complaining.
First of all, I'm not "complaining" about hunters. I'm explaining a view of hunting from my perspective as a Buddhist. It's the path I follow.

We're talking a karma perspective here. The karma of killing for "sport" versus killing to eating is that the former is a heavier motivation. Killing for "sport" is killing for fun and for pride. You must admit that "trophy hunting" is fucked up.

I'm sorry you didn't understand that and have taken personal offense by my view. I'll be more careful to be sensitive to you in the future.

[jimnyc]

First of all, I'm not telling you what you eat is wrong. Second, I eat meat. What I don't do, is have someone specifically kill an animal or a fish for ME. It puts me in an awkward position, in that if someone gifted me a fish he caught for ME I couldn't eat it.

I am one of those people who cannot be a vegetarian. I've tried. I feel better when I eat meat once or twice a week. The same is true for the Dalai Lama. What it means for him, as a monk, is that he incurs karma of meat eating a couple times a week.

If you're not a Buddhist, it doesn't matter so much. I know it doesn't make so much sense. Believe me, I've debated these issues with my Buddhist teachers for years.

So you eat meat, and then cry out against those who bring it to you, whether that be a hunter or a farm? It doesn't place you in an akward position, it makes you a hypocrite.

[Wind Song]

So you eat meat, and then cry out against those who bring it to you, whether that be a hunter or a farm? It doesn't place you in an akward position, it makes you a hypocrite.

Not at all. I accumulate karma from eating meat no matter who kills it. The karma is heavier if I killed the animal myself or personally had someone else kill it for me. Similarly, I accumulate karma eating vegetables, grains, dairy etc. Beings are killed in the harvesting of food.

You don't understand the view. That's fine.

If you're no Buddhist, no problem.

[jimnyc]

First of all, I'm not "complaining" about hunters. I'm explaining a view of hunting from my perspective as a Buddhist. It's the path I follow.

Take this as a friendly bit of criticism...

Don't look at every thread on this board as a Buddhist. The thread went from a discussion about animal cruelty about a specific news story, to ALL killing of animals is wrong and hunting is wrong - mainly because of YOUR Buddhist beliefs. We have a lot of Catholics/Christians on this board, and I wouldn't like it if they replied to every other thread in a Christian manner either. We have a religious subforum of you would like to discuss specific religious values and such.

[Wind Song]

Take this as a friendly bit of criticism...

Don't look at every thread on this board as a Buddhist. The thread went from a discussion about animal cruelty about a specific news story, to ALL killing of animals is wrong and hunting is wrong - mainly because of YOUR Buddhist beliefs. We have a lot of Catholics/Christians on this board, and I wouldn't like it if they replied to every other thread in a Christian manner either. We have a religious subforum of you would like to discuss specific religious values and such.

I'm sorry but what you are asking me to do is impossible. I'm going to look at issues from the perspective of who I am as a human being.

I don't have to post much. I'll just stop by once and awhile.

[jimnyc]

Not at all. I accumulate karma from eating meat no matter who kills it. The karma is heavier if I killed the animal myself or personally had someone else kill it for me. Similarly, I accumulate karma eating vegetables, grains, dairy etc. Beings are killed in the harvesting of food.

You don't understand the view. That's fine.

If you're no Buddhist, no problem.

That's no more than an excuse to right things in your mind. Making back karma won't do jack shit to help the dead animal.

So hell, you can eat a cow, because you'll just get some karma accumulating, but have a plat of veggies and it will offset it? LOL That's ludicrous.

What about assaulting someone, gotta be some negative karma coming from that one. What do you need to do to offset it, walk an old lady across the road?

[Wind Song]

That's no more than an excuse to right things in your mind. Making back karma won't do jack shit to help the dead animal.

So hell, you can eat a cow, because you'll just get some karma accumulating, but have a plat of veggies and it will offset it? LOL That's ludicrous.

What about assaulting someone, gotta be some negative karma coming from that one. What do you need to do to offset it, walk an old lady across the road?
It's not an excuse at all. If I eat meat, I have supported a butcher, a rancher and the whole meat industry. That's karma.

What I can do to mitigate that karma is to remember ever time I eat meat, that the meat was once a living being, like myself who wanted to be happy and free of suffering.

[Mr. P]

Please show me the post I've written that you think "attacks" hunters. I'm not saying ALL hunters kill for pride. I'm saying you either hunt for hunger, (which is greed, desire), or for pride.

Some hunters are very mindful of taking a life and they regret doing so even if they have to kill to eat.

It's a consciousness issue.

Hunger is NOT greed nor desire, it's a natural need for nourishment. Again, only few hunt for pride out of millions.
Most hunters are mindful of harvesting an animal and they know the purpose is beneficial in many ways.

[jimnyc]

I'm sorry but what you are asking me to do is impossible. I'm going to look at issues from the perspective of who I am as a human being.

I don't have to post much. I'll just stop by once and awhile.

It's impossible for you to leave your religion out of non-religious threads? I've seen you do it already in many other threads. It's NOT impossible.

[Wind Song]

Hunger is NOT greed nor desire, it's a natural need for nourishment. Again, only few hunt for pride out of millions.
Most hunters are mindful of harvesting an animal and they know the purpose is beneficial in many ways.


Hunger is desire. It is wanting, and the motivation is selfish. It's personal survival.

Hunters who are mindful and regret killing and do so for food have less intense karma than those who kill for profit, or sport.

[jimnyc]

It's not an excuse at all. If I eat meat, I have supported a butcher, a rancher and the whole meat industry. That's karma.

What I can do to mitigate that karma is to remember ever time I eat meat, that the meat was once a living being, like myself who wanted to be happy and free of suffering.

You somehow justify the bad karma you see in killing animals, by doing something else that results in good karma. That's making an excuse for the food you eat.

[Wind Song]

It's impossible for you to leave your religion out of non-religious threads? I've seen you do it already in many other threads. It's NOT impossible.
It's impossible for me to discuss killling without getting into my views of it.

[Wind Song]

You somehow justify the bad karma you see in killing animals, by doing something else that results in good karma. That's making an excuse for the food you eat.

No, I'm not justifying bad karma at all. I accrue karma by eating meat. Period. At the very least, I can be as conscious in eating it as a hunter who is motivated by hunger. We share the same motivation. I eat meat because I'm hungry. I'm eating because I want to be happy and free of hunger.

I can acknowledge that this being gave it's life so that I may live. I can acknowledge my debt to this being. The animal I'm eating also wanted to be happy and free of suffering.

[jimnyc]

No, I'm not justifying bad karma at all. I accrue karma by eating meat. Period. At the very least, I can be as conscious in eating it as a hunter who is motivated by hunger. We share the same motivation. I eat meat because I'm hungry.

My Mommy had a term for people like you - wackanoodle

[Wind Song]

My Mommy had a term for people like you - wackanoodle

Ah, well that's not the worst thing I've ever been called. I get your point though. There's too much Dorothy in this topic.

Time for me to do something else.

[jimnyc]

Ah, well that's not the worst thing I've ever been called. I get your point though. There's too much Dorothy in this topic.

Time for me to do something else.

Take it as a compliment. She called me that often too, and I'm like the coolest guy in the entire universe. :slap:

[Nukeman]

No, I'm not justifying bad karma at all. I accrue karma by eating meat. Period. At the very least, I can be as conscious in eating it as a hunter who is motivated by hunger. We share the same motivation. I eat meat because I'm hungry. I'm eating because I want to be happy and free of hunger.

I can acknowledge that this being gave it's life so that I may live. I can acknowledge my debt to this being. The animal I'm eating also wanted to be happy and free of suffering.Are you saying there is "bad" karma????

[fj1200]

Greed.

The motivation is profit.

Profit is not greed.


Some hunters kill because they get off on killing. They do it for pride.

You have statistics on how many who hunt, deer for example, "get off on killing" or "pride" then?


I'm saying you either hunt for hunger, (which is greed, desire), or for pride.

So hunger is greed is desire and hence is bad and pride is also bad... Makes it tough to be a good Buddhist wouldn't it?

[Little-Acorn]

People who complain about hunters are called whiners. They complain because they enjoy complaining.

First of all, I'm not "complaining" about hunters.
That sound you all just heard was Wind Song backpedalling at high speed....


I'm sorry you didn't understand that
....and then announcing that it was all my fault.

Typical for those who say silly things in an attempt to denigrate others, and then cannot back them up when challenged on them, but who lack the basic integrity to admit they were wrong.

[Dilloduck]

I've hunted and fished and came home without killing a thing.It was still lots of fun and I go back to do it again. Try again, troll.

[Dilloduck]

First of all, I'm not "complaining" about hunters. I'm explaining a view of hunting from my perspective as a Buddhist. It's the path I follow.

We're talking a karma perspective here. The karma of killing for "sport" versus killing to eating is that the former is a heavier motivation. Killing for "sport" is killing for fun and for pride. You must admit that "trophy hunting" is fucked up.

I'm sorry you didn't understand that and have taken personal offense by my view. I'll be more careful to be sensitive to you in the future.

You are judging hunters by speculating as to their motivation. As much as you love to rationalize your posts they are still not so subtle judgements of others. Does Buddha think that is good karma ?

[Mr. P]

Hunger is desire. It is wanting, and the motivation is selfish. It's personal survival.

Hunters who are mindful and regret killing and do so for food have less intense karma than those who kill for profit, or sport.

Ok, you don't have the knowledge to debate your opinion. Hunger is a Biological NEED for nourishment, nothing more. I am done with ya on this topic of hunting which you now seem to wanna shift to Karma.

[SassyLady]

My point is that hunters kill for enjoyment.




"One should speak only pleasant words, words which are acceptable (to others). What one speaks without bringing evils to others is pleasant."— Thag 21 (http://www.accesstoinsight.org/tipitaka/kn/thag/thag.21.00.irel.html#poem-05)

I would think that as an advocate of Right Speech you would not come to this board and actively poke at people, regardless of how you feel about hunters.

I personally think those that "hunt" are the people I want to know when the trucks are no longer able to deliver food from the slaughterhouses to the markets. Hopefully, they have been practicing by "hunting for sport".

[Missileman]

Kill to eat= motivation, greed, hunger

Kill for fun= hunting for sport, motivation pride, ignorance

Not being hungry = greed?

[darin]

You folk allowed that piece of crap to change the subject. :(

[Dilloduck]

You planning on water boarding her ?:laugh:

You can't nail Jello to a wall.

[RadiomanATL]

I eat meat. I enjoy deep sea fishing.

I must be evil.

[Noir]

Animal cruelty laws make no sense, you can be as cruel as you like to some animals, but not others.

IMO it all comes down to 'killing all animals for fun' is a-okay, or not, and (surprise surprise) I come down on the 'not' side.

Ultimatly we know we are causing these animals fear and distress followed by likey injury or death. And on a fundamental level I don't think thats justifiable.

[Dilloduck]

Animal cruelty laws make no sense, you can be as cruel as you like to some animals, but not others.

IMO it all comes down to 'killing all animals for fun' is a-okay, or not, and (surprise surprise) I come down on the 'not' side.

Ultimatly we know we are causing these animals fear and distress followed by likey injury or death. And on a fundamental level I don't think thats justifiable.

Society makes no sense. You can say some words and others you can't. You can post some pictures and some you can't.
Anything is justifiable.

[jimnyc]

Animal cruelty laws make no sense, you can be as cruel as you like to some animals, but not others.

IMO it all comes down to 'killing all animals for fun' is a-okay, or not, and (surprise surprise) I come down on the 'not' side.

Ultimatly we know we are causing these animals fear and distress followed by likey injury or death. And on a fundamental level I don't think thats justifiable.

Depends on your definition, I suppose. Here, there aren't a lot of animals that you CAN be cruel to, at least by the typical persons definition. I mean, I suppose you could be cruel to mosquitoes, worms and other "animals", but you can't do so to the majority of them.

The mass killing of farm animals for food I don't see as cruel, although I myself still could never do such a job. But they do try to come up with better and better systems to perform the job quicker and more humanely. They don't sit there and generally poke an animal with needles, stomp them to death, beat them with bats like the other story mentioned ('cept for the baby seals, and those guys doing it should be shot, IMO).

Going out of ones way to purposely and slowly kill an animal, in a way to cause the most suffering, for ones enjoyment, is what I would call cruel. Here's the opening definition on Wiki, which I think makes sense...


Cruelty to animals, also called animal abuse or animal neglect, is the infliction of suffering or harm upon non-human animals, for purposes other than self-defense. More narrowly, it can be harm for specific gain, such as killing animals for food or for their fur, although opinions differ with respect to the method of slaughter. Diverging viewpoints are held by jurisdictions throughout the world.

Broadly speaking, there are two approaches to the issue. The animal welfare position holds that there is nothing inherently wrong with using animals for human purposes, such as food, clothing, entertainment, and research, but that it should be done in a humane way that minimizes unnecessary pain and suffering. Animal rights theorists criticize this position, arguing that the words "unnecessary" and "humane" are subject to widely differing interpretations, and that the only way to ensure protection for animals is to end their status as property, and to ensure that they are never used as commodities. Laws concerning animal cruelty are designed to prevent needless cruelty to animals, rather than killing for other aims such as food, or they concern species not eaten as food in the country involved, such as those regarded as pets.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cruelty_to_animals

[ConHog]

I've only read the first few posts in this thread, so perhaps someone has already told Windy Dong this, and in case she will never listen anyway; BUT there is a VAST difference between hunting/killing for sport and killing just because you enjoy being cruel.

I don't personally hunt because after 20 years in the military I have no desire to traipse around looking for something to shoot, and I don't need or enjoy the meat enough to do so, but Windy you should have your ass kicked for comparing a guy who hunts to a guy who bashes a kitty's head in for shits and grins.

[Mr. P]

I've only read the first few posts in this thread, so perhaps someone has already told Windy Dong this, and in case she will never listen anyway; BUT there is a VAST difference between hunting/killing for sport and killing just because you enjoy being cruel.

I don't personally hunt because after 20 years in the military I have no desire to traipse around looking for something to shoot, and I don't need or enjoy the meat enough to do so, but Windy you should have your ass kicked for comparing a guy who hunts to a guy who bashes a kitty's head in for shits and grins.

She pretty much has but I don't think she knows it nor understands.

[fj1200]

Ultimatly we know we are causing these animals fear and distress followed by likey injury or death. And on a fundamental level I don't think thats justifiable.

Because animals living in nature are enwrapped in peace and tranquility?

[Missileman]

Because animals living in nature are enwrapped in peace and tranquility?

Of course! Getting torn to shreds by a lion is much more peaceful and tranquil than a headshot from an .06

[ConHog]

Hey Windy Dong, here is something else to consider. IF not for controlled hunting wild animals would over populate some areas which isn't good for us or them. A few years ago In Arkansas they were BEGGING people to hunt deer up where I live because the deer were over populated and starving to death because the ecosystem couldn't support all of them.

[Anton Chigurh]

http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/423419_3518114349742_1178514464_3568053_1006340614 _n.jpg

[Mr. P]

http://a8.sphotos.ak.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ak-ash4/423419_3518114349742_1178514464_3568053_1006340614 _n.jpg

:laugh: yeah, that's the level we're dealing with! :laugh:

[fj1200]

Of course! Getting torn to shreds by a lion is much more peaceful and tranquil than a headshot from an .06

I read that Cheetahs basically suffocate their prey by clamping their jaws on its neck. I wouldn't have guessed that's how they did it but I can see now how wonderful it is to go that way. It would be just like falling asleep... serenity now...

[Dilloduck]

She pretty much has but I don't think she knows it nor understands.


She enjoys it.

[jimnyc]

I read that Cheetahs basically suffocate their prey by clamping their jaws on its neck. I wouldn't have guessed that's how they did it but I can see now how wonderful it is to go that way. It would be just like falling asleep... serenity now...

LOL reminds me of a Seinfeld episode, where George's father was trying to control his temper with the "serenity now" stuff.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/oqm4LG8_3vE" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

[DragonStryk72]

My point is that hunters kill for enjoyment.

Really? I wasn't aware that cheetahs were hunting down prey for fun.

So, Wind Song, clearly you're a friend of the environment, so why do you wish to destroy it? Let's say we all stop hunting, now and forever, how long do you think before deer massively overpopulate and start dying off? When they do overpopulate, how many other species get to die because of them?

Why is hunting "only for enjoyment and cruelty" but there's some inherent nobility to killing a cow, a chicken, sheep, or a pig? Believe it or not there are quotas of what needs to be taken down as far the deer population goes to keep them from overrunning.

[DragonStryk72]

Animal cruelty laws make no sense, you can be as cruel as you like to some animals, but not others.

IMO it all comes down to 'killing all animals for fun' is a-okay, or not, and (surprise surprise) I come down on the 'not' side.

Ultimately we know we are causing these animals fear and distress followed by likely injury or death. And on a fundamental level I don't think thats justifiable.

Well, first off, our laws do encompass even the things we hunt. This is why we are not allowed to set up traps and such for deer that breaks their legs or do other stuff to them. Hunters pride themselves on a quick kill, so in general, they don't want the deer to suffer. A trend that's been catching on in the hampton roads area of VA is to offer a prayer to the dying creature.

Animals in the wild live lives of fear and distress. We're just another piece of traffic in their lives, because no matter what you are, in the wild there is something that eats you.

Actually, we have to hunt, noir. it just isn't as simple as leaving the deer alone, because in the end, they just overpopulate and die off of starvation when the area can no longer support them, and they won't be alone. When they've picked clean an area, lots of other animals will die as well.

[LuvRPgrl]

No, I'm not justifying bad karma at all. I accrue karma by eating meat. Period. At the very least, I can be as conscious in eating it as a hunter who is motivated by hunger. We share the same motivation. I eat meat because I'm hungry. I'm eating because I want to be happy and free of hunger.

I can acknowledge that this being gave it's life so that I may live. I can acknowledge my debt to this being. The animal I'm eating also wanted to be happy and free of suffering.

Your religion is a joke.
Does it provide for bad karma when one presents false information and half lies, full lies and general bullshit on a message board?

What is karma anyways, how does it work, who controls it, where does it get its energy from?ou
Is it just a naturally occuring phenomenon, just a part of the same mother nature that makes us hungry and requires you eat meat to feel at your best?
You believe in this so strongly, tell us how it works.

I think you choose to be a budhist only because it is a, and maybe for you, the best alternative to the real God of Christianity, whom you want to deny.
Its not so much you believe in buddhism, but you dont want to believe in Jesus.
You do know that denying the one and only true God is bad karma?

[DragonStryk72]

Your religion is a joke.
Does it provide for bad karma when one presents false information and half lies, full lies and general bullshit on a message board?

What is karma anyways, how does it work, who controls it, where does it get its energy from?ou
Is it just a naturally occuring phenomenon, just a part of the same mother nature that makes us hungry and requires you eat meat to feel at your best?
You believe in this so strongly, tell us how it works.

I think you choose to be a budhist only because it is a, and maybe for you, the best alternative to the real God of Christianity, whom you want to deny.
Its not so much you believe in buddhism, but you dont want to believe in Jesus.
You do know that denying the one and only true God is bad karma?

Hold on, point of order: Buddhism isn't a joke.
Karma is essentially built up over time, both good and bad, based upon the actions one takes, with your own energy coming back on you eventually. According to the belief, it is part of a central energy that connects all living things, and thus is not "controlled" per se, by anyone. Buddhists eat no meat because they do not kill animals, because they respect all living things, and they do not own things because they believe that material goods separate us from a higher consciousness.

However, many people take up these religions as a sort of excuse to act as they wish, just as some people take up what I call "CHRISTIANity", as opposed to Christianity, and we've all met the type, the people who use the Bible to enforce their hate, or make themselves "better" than everyone else, twisting verse after verse to suit their own aims.

I have no problem with Buddhists who are holding to the tenets. We had a Buddhist in my boot camp division, Phanixay (he was there from the Philippines) he was going in for Chaplain's Aide, and I gotta say, he managed to smile all the way through it all. He was a good guy, never judgmental, he just went about his way and did his part. My problem is always with the ones who claim a belief just to support whatever bile they wish to throw out there.

[LuvRPgrl]

Hold on, point of order: Buddhism isn't a joke.
Karma is essentially built up over time, both good and bad, based upon the actions one takes, with your own energy coming back on you eventually. According to the belief, it is part of a central energy that connects all living things, and thus is not "controlled" per se, by anyone. Buddhists eat no meat because they do not kill animals, because they respect all living things, and they do not own things because they believe that material goods separate us from a higher consciousness.

However, many people take up these religions as a sort of excuse to act as they wish, just as some people take up what I call "CHRISTIANity", as opposed to Christianity, and we've all met the type, the people who use the Bible to enforce their hate, or make themselves "better" than everyone else, twisting verse after verse to suit their own aims.

I have no problem with Buddhists who are holding to the tenets. We had a Buddhist in my boot camp division, Phanixay (he was there from the Philippines) he was going in for Chaplain's Aide, and I gotta say, he managed to smile all the way through it all. He was a good guy, never judgmental, he just went about his way and did his part. My problem is always with the ones who claim a belief just to support whatever bile they wish to throw out there.


I dont judge a religion based on its practioners, but on the actual content of its belief system. Im still not understanding how the "karma energy" thing works. They claim thats how it is, but please tell me, what exactly, if anything, supports their theory?
People, critics call Christianity a joke, fairy tale, yet dont criticize, or very rarely criticize such fairy tales as buddism and islam

[Wind Song]

I eat meat. I enjoy deep sea fishing.

I must be evil.
No, you're not evil for eating meat and fishing. It's more your intention in relating to others that either meets or doesn't meet the definition of evil.


Your religion is a joke.
Does it provide for bad karma when one presents false information and half lies, full lies and general bullshit on a message board?

What is karma anyways, how does it work, who controls it, where does it get its energy from?ou
Is it just a naturally occuring phenomenon, just a part of the same mother nature that makes us hungry and requires you eat meat to feel at your best?
You believe in this so strongly, tell us how it works.

I think you choose to be a budhist only because it is a, and maybe for you, the best alternative to the real God of Christianity, whom you want to deny.
Its not so much you believe in buddhism, but you dont want to believe in Jesus.
You do know that denying the one and only true God is bad karma?

What is karma? Simply cause and effect. Actions have consequences.

I chose Buddhism to abide by because it makes more sense than any other religion to me.

There is karma accumulated in eating meat because a being dies intentionally. I suppose road kill would be a pure meat, it was NOT intentionally killed out of a motive for hunger, greed or pride.

I would point out that I am not insulting your religion, saying that it is a joke or filled with lies.

Why is that necessary for you?


Really? I wasn't aware that cheetahs were hunting down prey for fun.

So, Wind Song, clearly you're a friend of the environment, so why do you wish to destroy it? Let's say we all stop hunting, now and forever, how long do you think before deer massively overpopulate and start dying off? When they do overpopulate, how many other species get to die because of them?

Why is hunting "only for enjoyment and cruelty" but there's some inherent nobility to killing a cow, a chicken, sheep, or a pig? Believe it or not there are quotas of what needs to be taken down as far the deer population goes to keep them from overrunning.
Sport's hunters kill for the glory of putting a stuffed head on their wall.


Hey Windy Dong, here is something else to consider. IF not for controlled hunting wild animals would over populate some areas which isn't good for us or them. A few years ago In Arkansas they were BEGGING people to hunt deer up where I live because the deer were over populated and starving to death because the ecosystem couldn't support all of them.
Hey, name caller.

I don't care if other people hunt as long as they understand that actions have consequences, and that hunters kill for different motivations. They are not all the same.


I've only read the first few posts in this thread, so perhaps someone has already told Windy Dong this, and in case she will never listen anyway; BUT there is a VAST difference between hunting/killing for sport and killing just because you enjoy being cruel.

I don't personally hunt because after 20 years in the military I have no desire to traipse around looking for something to shoot, and I don't need or enjoy the meat enough to do so, but Windy you should have your ass kicked for comparing a guy who hunts to a guy who bashes a kitty's head in for shits and grins.

Killilng for sport is cruel. Killing just to get a head on your wall is cruel. Name calling is not making your arguments any stronger. It makes YOU look bad.

[cadet]

Killilng for sport is cruel. Killing just to get a head on your wall is cruel. Name calling is not making your arguments any stronger. It makes YOU look bad.

most of those that hunt, don't find anything. In fact, it's really relaxing, sitting around, waiting for something to happen.

whether you like it or not, people who hunt are just relaxing, not to go out and go ape shit nuts and blow off some steam.


and, FYI, if you don't like killing of animals so much, you should just go be a vegetarian, and kill those poor plants. plants have feelings too. :laugh: Heartless monster, killing veggies for the fun of it.

[Wind Song]

most of those that hunt, don't find anything. In fact, it's really relaxing, sitting around, waiting for something to happen.

whether you like it or not, people who hunt are just relaxing, not to go out and go ape shit nuts and blow off some steam.


and, FYI, if you don't like killing of animals so much, you should just go be a vegetarian, and kill those poor plants. plants have feelings too. :laugh: Heartless monster, killing veggies for the fun of it.

Boy, you folks don't read well. I'm not callling for an end to hunting. I am discussing why some forms of hunting are cruel. I'm talking about how some killing is motivated by greed and some is motivated by pride.

Are you suggesting that some hunters kill animals to blow off steam so they don't go ape shit and kill people?

There is karma in any kind of harvesting of grains. Insects are killed. Vegetarians are not free of the karma of killing.

[cadet]

Boy, you folks don't read well. I'm not callling for an end to hunting. I am discussing why some forms of hunting are cruel. I'm talking about how some killing is motivated by greed and some is motivated by pride.

Are you suggesting that some hunters kill animals to blow off steam so they don't go ape shit and kill people?

There is karma in any kind of harvesting of grains. Insects are killed. Vegetarians are not free of the karma of killing.

to live you must eat...
you saying it's bad to live?

And no, i was not suggesting some hunters go to blow off steam. i was suggesting the idea that most go out there to be one with nature/god/allah/etc. it's very peaceful sitting around outside.

[Wind Song]

to live you must eat...
you saying it's bad to live?

And no, i was not suggesting some hunters go to blow off steam. i was suggesting the idea that most go out there to be one with nature/god/allah/etc. it's very peaceful sitting around outside.

I'm saying that you cannot eat to live without owing living beings a debt, whether you are vegetarian or a meat eater.

That's samsara.

Killing isn't necesary to be "one with God".

[cadet]

I'm saying that you cannot eat to live without owing living beings a debt, whether you are vegetarian or a meat eater.

That's samsara.

Killing isn't necesary to be "one with God".

the vast majority of the time you don't kill anything... most will go out for a week and only get one.

and, by the by, if we didn't have hunting, there would be a overabundance of deer. starving themselves to death due to a lack of food, and more running out to get hit by cars, killing more people, famine among deer, disease, etc.

[Wind Song]

the vast majority of the time you don't kill anything... most will go out for a week and only get one.

and, by the by, if we didn't have hunting, there would be a overabundance of deer. starving themselves to death due to a lack of food, and more running out to get hit by cars, killing more people, famine among deer, disease, etc.

Yeah, I know. The hunting is conservation argument. That's because we hunted to death most of the natural predators of deer. What I noticed a lot in Oregon is a bunch of drunk guys in pickups using high powered rifles and shooting anything in sight.

I guess according to you, they're just harmless and blowing off steam.

Natural predators kill of the sickest and weakest animals. And in cases of overpopulation, starvation and disease are nature's (unfortunate) way of removing the weakest and bringing back a good balance.
Hunters don't try to kill only the weaker animals. They often kill the strongest and healthiest animals. They prefer the bucks with the largest rack. The weaker and genetically inferior bucks are left to propagate the species, weakening the overall health of the herd. Killing of a large number of mature males also creates a disproportionate ratio of females to males, impacting the social structure of a herd.

A very large number of animals are wounded, but not killed by hunters. These animals have to suffer prolonged and painful deaths.

Hunting is a violent form of recreation. Watching some animal bleed to death is fun?

[Dilloduck]

Thank you for informing us that actions have consequences. I'm sure most people here had no clue. By the way--you don't have to chose ANY religion if you don't wish too. I don't want you to feel tied to the one that made most sense.

[Wind Song]

Thank you for informing us that actions have consequences. I'm sure most people here had no clue. By the way--you don't have to chose ANY religion if you don't wish too. I don't want you to feel tied to the one that made most sense.

Thank you. I'm certain you had no clue that actions have consequences, or you would have posted a different reply.

I've chosen a path to enlightenment, you haven't.

[SassyLady]

Sport's hunters kill for the glory of putting a stuffed head on their wall.

My stepson hunts, has trophies.......but everything he has killed he fed his family. Are you saying that people who put trophies on their wall waste the meat?

I think you are pissed about the Trump boys ... and if you look a little further into the story, you'll see that the meat was donated to local villages.



When the photos made the rounds, Don Jr. denied leaking them himself for publicity purposes—but also said that he had nothing to apologize for, as the meat from his and Eric's various kills went to feeding an entire village.

"We are both avid outdoorsmen and were brought up hunting and fishing with our Grandfather who taught us that nothing should ever be taken for granted or wasted," the brothers said in a statement as Don Jr. went about defending himself to a ravenous pack of critics on Twitter

Read more: http://www.eonline.com/news/trump_safari_controversy_sponsor_fires/301511#ixzz1pgo0W7TA

[MtnBiker]

Some things to consider. Tyson will kill more animals in an hour that any hunter will in a lifetime. The conditions of those deaths and deaths that animals endure "naturally" will have little difference to the animals. Outdoor sportsmen support wildlife far greater than non sportsmens. And why is it people that do not hunt worry about how an animal dies rather than how an animal lives?

[SassyLady]

Some things to consider. Tyson will kill more animals in an hour that any hunter will in a lifetime. The conditions of those deaths and deaths that animals endure "naturally" will have little difference to the animals. Outdoor sportsmen support wildlife far greater than non sportsmens. And why is it people that do not hunt worry about how an animal dies rather than how an animal lives?

I believe there is a poster here who believes it is OK for Tyson to kill so many because it isn't hunting/sport/collecting trophies. It's just downright slaughter to satisfy the "desire" of humans to fill their bellies. Bad, bad karma for both I guess, but with an exponential factor of ????? if it's for sport.

[Noir]

Because animals living in nature are enwrapped in peace and tranquility?

No, but that doesn't mean we should go out of out way to increase such fear and suffering.

[Noir]

Well, first off, our laws do encompass even the things we hunt. This is why we are not allowed to set up traps and such for deer that breaks their legs or do other stuff to them. Hunters pride themselves on a quick kill, so in general, they don't want the deer to suffer. A trend that's been catching on in the hampton roads area of VA is to offer a prayer to the dying creature.

i can't speak for American laws, but i know the UK ones are a hash of trying to make it legal to kill/maim wild animals while its illegal to mistreat other animals (even if they are exactly the same animal) that are in your care.


Animals in the wild live lives of fear and distress. We're just another piece of traffic in their lives, because no matter what you are, in the wild there is something that eats you.


Thats no argument, 'the animals suffer anyway so what should it matter if i make them suffer more'? idk were that goes morally but i'm guessing its not good.


Actually, we have to hunt, noir. it just isn't as simple as leaving the deer alone, because in the end, they just overpopulate and die off of starvation when the area can no longer support them, and they won't be alone. When they've picked clean an area, lots of other animals will die as well.

Whats so wrong with letting nature deal with the eco-system? If an area can support a type of life it with flourish, if not then we shouldn't be artificially keeping animals in (or out) the eco-system, george carlin covered that well in his 'haven't we done enough?' rant IMO.

[MtnBiker]

No, but that doesn't mean we should go out of out way to increase such fear and suffering.


How does a game animal experience fear from a hunter?

[SassyLady]

How does a game animal experience fear from a hunter?

Because we yell "Boo" before we jump out and kill them.

[Noir]

How does a game animal experience fear from a hunter?

Depends on the animal, but one thing that is universal is that unless the hunted animal is killed instantly, first time, by the hunter, then it will be subject to varying levels of fear, but i'd think that obvious.

[Wind Song]

I believe there is a poster here who believes it is OK for Tyson to kill so many because it isn't hunting/sport/collecting trophies. It's just downright slaughter to satisfy the "desire" of humans to fill their bellies. Bad, bad karma for both I guess, but with an exponential factor of ????? if it's for sport.
Clearly, you don't understand what I've been talking about. I never stated it is OK for Tyson to kill animals. Tyson's motivation is greed, and the animals suffer under the conditions they live in before they are slaughtered.

I'm discussing the topic of karma, and I'm saying that there are different motives for killing animals. Some kill motivated it out of hatred or cruelty, some do it for greed, some do it for selfish hunger, some do it for the "pride" of putting up a trophy.

There is karma in killing. How bad the karma is depends on the motivation.

If you kill consciously, and you regret doing so, and the only reason you are killling the animal is to keep from starving, and you pray for the animal's enlightenment, that is one kind of karma. It's less heavy than killing for hatred or greed.

That said, clearly, no one here is interested in the consequences of killing.

[SassyLady]

Clearly, you don't understand what I've been talking about. I never stated it is OK for Tyson to kill animals. Tyson's motivation is greed, and the animals suffer under the conditions they live in before they are slaughtered.

I'm discussing the topic of karma, and I'm saying that there are different motives for killing animals. Some kill motivated it out of hatred or cruelty, some do it for greed, some do it for selfish hunger, some do it for the "pride" of putting up a trophy.

There is karma in killing. How bad the karma is depends on the motivation.

If you kill consciously, and you regret doing so, and the only reason you are killling the animal is to keep from starving, and you pray for the animal's enlightenment, that is one kind of karma. It's less heavy than killing for hatred or greed.

That said, clearly, no one here is interested in the consequences of killing.

There you go using that word again ....... how's it working for you. Have you gotten any one here to see any of your ideology clearly yet?

[Missileman]

Whats so wrong with letting nature deal with the eco-system? If an area can support a type of life it with flourish, if not then we shouldn't be artificially keeping animals in (or out) the eco-system, george carlin covered that well in his 'haven't we done enough?' rant IMO.

What's wrong with admitting that humans are also a part of the ecosystem, part of nature, and a part of the food chain. Our taking of game is no less a part of nature than the other animals on the planet.

[Noir]

What's wrong with admitting that humans are also a part of the ecosystem, part of nature, and a part of the food chain. Our taking of game is no less a part of nature than the other animals on the planet.

Killing for sport and killing for the food chain are two totally different debates, and while i am against both (obviously) this topic is about blood sports, not food chains, we should not be killing/maiming for 'fun' IMO

[Wind Song]

There you go using that word again ....... how's it working for you. Have you gotten any one here to see any of your ideology clearly yet?


Clearly, you'd rather not have an exchange of ideas.

[Missileman]

Killing for sport and killing for the food chain are two totally different debates, and while i am against both (obviously) this topic is about blood sports, not food chains, we should not be killing/maiming for 'fun' IMO

Most hunting is done for food, not for fun.

[Wind Song]

Most hunting is done for food, not for fun.


Quantify "most".

[Missileman]

Quantify "most".

Quantify "clearly"

[MtnBiker]

Depends on the animal, but one thing that is universal is that unless the hunted animal is killed instantly, first time, by the hunter, then it will be subject to varying levels of fear, but i'd think that obvious.

An animal will certianly react with instinct to a situation caused either by a hunter or another cause. Assigning a human emotion to that animal's instinct is not obvious. Nor is it obvious that the instinct is increased by the presence of a hunter.

How does a hunter increase an aminal's suffering? When an aminal dies in the wild does it not suffer?

[Wind Song]

Quantify "clearly"


After you.

[Noir]

An animal will certianly react with instinct to a situation caused either by a hunter or another cause. Assigning a human emotion to that animal's instinct is not obvious. Nor is it obvious that the instinct is increased by the presence of a hunter.

How does a hunter increase an aminal's suffering? When an aminal dies in the wild does it not suffer?

I'm guessing you already know my answers to these questions (especially the last one since i've already stated it twice in this thread) but if your level of this discussion is on the 'how do you know animals can experience a human emotion like fear' level then i've no interest continuing the discussion.

[MtnBiker]

Sportsmen contribute greatly to wildlife through hunting licenses, fees, waterfowl stamps, etc. Those monies go toward state fish and game wildlife management. Sportmen also contribute to organizations such as The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and Ducks Unlimited. This promotes good karma for such individuals. People who purchase their animal protein that is neatly packaged on a foam tray and wraped in plastic are promoting bad karma toward animals that must endure a caged exsistence only to have their pitiful lives ended by having their throats cut or herded in line and having bullet in their head.

[Wind Song]

Sportsmen contribute greatly to wildlife through hunting licenses, fees, waterfowl stamps, etc. Those monies go toward state fish and game wildlife management. Sportmen also contribute to organizations such as The Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation and Ducks Unlimited. This promotes good karma for such individuals. People who purchase their animal protein that is neatly packaged on a foam tray and wraped in plastic are promoting bad karma toward animals that must endure a caged exsistence only to have their pitiful lives ended by having their throats cut or herded in line and having bullet in their head.

I hear you. Like I said, this is samsara. The hunters, at the very least, have mixed karma.

[Dilloduck]

I hear you. Like I said, this is samsara. The hunters, at the very least, have mixed karma.

I call mine 'diverse karma'.

[Wind Song]

Ask me if I care, dillo. Go chase kathianne.

[Dilloduck]

Ask me if I care, dillo. Go chase kathianne.

now now---don't get your aura all ruffled. :laugh2:

[Wind Song]

now now---don't get your aura all ruffled. :laugh2:

Go bother the het set. I hear you're the king of unwanted contact.

[LuvRPgrl]

What's wrong with admitting that humans are also a part of the ecosystem, part of nature, and a part of the food chain. Our taking of game is no less a part of nature than the other animals on the planet.

that always cracks me up, how the naturalists, for lack of a better word, who dont believe in a God, make it out that humans have some special restriction on what we can do, and have responsability unlike any other animals when, as you say, we are only a part of the natural ecosystem.
why would I get bad karma if I killed a cow, but if a lion does, oh, then thats just natural

[Wind Song]

that always cracks me up, how the naturalists, for lack of a better word, who dont believe in a God, make it out that humans have some special restriction on what we can do, and have responsability unlike any other animals when, as you say, we are only a part of the natural ecosystem.
why would I get bad karma if I killed a cow, but if a lion does, oh, then thats just natural


Animals have karma too.

[Dilloduck]

Go bother the het set. I hear you're the king of unwanted contact.


I think you've achieved your share of negative attention for the day. Take a break before someone is nice to you.

[Wind Song]

I think you've achieved your share of negative attention for the day. Take a break before someone is nice to you.


It wouldn't be YOU being nice to me.

[Dilloduck]

It wouldn't be YOU being nice to me.

and mess up a whole day of you seeking abuse ?

[Wind Song]

and mess up a whole day of you seeking abuse ?

You are mistaking me for someone else. I stop talking to people who are abusive. I avoid people who have cruel streaks.

[LuvRPgrl]

that always cracks me up, how the naturalists, for lack of a better word, who dont believe in a God, make it out that humans have some special restriction on what we can do, and have responsability unlike any other animals when, as you say, we are only a part of the natural ecosystem.
why would I get bad karma if I killed a cow, but if a lion does, oh, then thats just natural


so a carnivorous animal that evolved so that they can only eat meat, get bad karma everytime they kill for survival?
Insects kill each other all the time, do they get bad karma too
If so, what do they receive for punishment, forced to listen to obama speeches for 48 straight hours.?

[Wind Song]

so a carnivorous animal that evolved so that they can only eat meat, get bad karma everytime they kill for survival?
Insects kill each other all the time, do they get bad karma too
If so, what do they receive for punishment, forced to listen to obama speeches for 48 straight hours.?


There is negative karma in killing other beings.

[LuvRPgrl]

There is negative karma in killing other beings.

everything eaten, is a being of some sort

[Wind Song]

everything eaten, is a being of some sort

Plants aren't "beings". But when plants are harvested insects are killed.

[logroller]

That said, clearly, no one here is interested in the consequences of killing.
Death? J/K
I think I understand what you're getting at with the karma thing; be virtuous. Aristotle discussed this at length; where any reasoned action, if taken to the extreme (ie vices), would be morally unsound. Alternatively, to be virtuous, one should act in moderation. There was more, of course, such as one's function being well-defined and well-executed, but the tenet of moderation is central to Aristotelian ethics. Meaning, to go through life rallying for the fair treatment of animals, being sure none are harmed at all cost, say to the extreme that people starve-- it wouldn't be morally sound due to lack of moderation. But in defense of hunting; they get one tag/year; and often those are done by lottery, so not even that much. If you're talking about poachers or something, that's obviously a lack of moderation too.


What's wrong with admitting that humans are also a part of the ecosystem, part of nature, and a part of the food chain. Our taking of game is no less a part of nature than the other animals on the planet.
Maybe its me being magnanimous, but I've always thought man's ability to reason right from wrong and act upon it separates us from 'nature' to a significant degree. This ability to rationalize gives us a powerful advantage over other species in the ecosystem; but with this power, comes responsibility.

[SassyLady]

Clearly, you'd rather not have an exchange of ideas.

Clearly, you don't want to listen to all the ideas that differ from yours and patronize those that disagree with you.

[DragonStryk72]

Sport's hunters kill for the glory of putting a stuffed head on their wall.

Really? You've talked with every single one? Wow, that'll be news to the Native Americans. I mean, they even accord full prayer for their hunting kills. And let's not forget that you lumped all hunters in, not just the people who hunt for sport, but for food and hunt to keep deer populations down so they don't overrun the area and starve not only themselves, but other creatures, to death.

How do you qualify that, the overabundance of life killing off life? Because that's the other option to hunting. Predators exist for a reason, even human predators.

[Wind Song]

Clearly, you don't want to listen to all the ideas that differ from yours and patronize those that disagree with you.

I'm perfectly willing to listen to other people's opinions and ideas. That doesn't mean I will change mine to suit you.


Really? You've talked with every single one? Wow, that'll be news to the Native Americans. I mean, they even accord full prayer for their hunting kills. And let's not forget that you lumped all hunters in, not just the people who hunt for sport, but for food and hunt to keep deer populations down so they don't overrun the area and starve not only themselves, but other creatures, to death.

How do you qualify that, the overabundance of life killing off life? Because that's the other option to hunting. Predators exist for a reason, even human predators.

I'm not talking about Native Americans and you know it. I'm talking about the karma that is involved in taking life. Yes, I've heard all the arguments about hunting for food, and keeping deer populations down etc etc.

It doesn't take away from my argument.

[fj1200]

No, but that doesn't mean we should go out of out way to increase such fear and suffering.

I'm guessing a hunter does not add to such fears more than a mountain lion with its jaws around the throat of a dear.


Whats so wrong with letting nature deal with the eco-system? If an area can support a type of life it with flourish, if not then we shouldn't be artificially keeping animals in (or out) the eco-system, george carlin covered that well in his 'haven't we done enough?' rant IMO.

Do you think that's the best way to deal with Kangaroos who live in the suburbs in Australians cities whose population expands too far because of the lack of a natural predator? Except for the cars that hit them of course.


Clearly...

I'm discussing the topic of karma, and I'm saying that there are different motives for killing animals. Some kill motivated it out of hatred or cruelty, some do it for greed, some do it for selfish hunger, some do it for the "pride" of putting up a trophy.

... clearly...

Clearly... karma is a b!tch because it seems that you are going to be karma negative just by the exercising the necessity to eat to sustain yourself.

[Wind Song]

There is no negative karma connected with roadkill because it is accidental death.

[fj1200]

^What if I chase a deer into the road?

[LuvRPgrl]

Plants aren't "beings". But when plants are harvested insects are killed.
;
YOU dont get to choose definitions:
DICTIONARY.COM be·ing  <NOSCRIPT></NOSCRIPT> /ˈbiɪŋ/ Show Spelled Show IPA
noun 1. the fact of existing; existence (as opposed to nonexistence).

World English Dictionary

<TBODY>
[B]being (ˈbiːɪŋ)








1.
the state or fact of existing; existence

</TBODY>
to exist or live: Shakespeare's “To be or not to be” is the ultimate question.
I DO BELIEVE PLANTS EXIST, YOU AGREE?
YOU Ignbored the rest of the post.
Your Being(there's that word again) in favor of gun control, makes you a supporter, at the least, a supporter of liberals.

[Wind Song]

^What if I chase a deer into the road?


I think you know the answer to that.

[logroller]

;
YOU dont get to choose definitions:
DICTIONARY.COM be·ing  <noscript></noscript> /ˈbiɪŋ/ Show Spelled Show IPA
noun 1. the fact of existing; existence (as opposed to nonexistence).

World English Dictionary

<tbody>
[B]being (ˈbiːɪŋ)








1.
the state or fact of existing; existence

</tbody>
to exist or live: Shakespeare's “To be or not to be” is the ultimate question.
I DO BELIEVE PLANTS EXIST, YOU AGREE?
YOU Ignbored the rest of the post.
Your Being(there's that word again) in favor of gun control, makes you a supporter, at the least, a supporter of liberals.
Im in fAvor of Gun control -- especially the Isosceles stance...though I'm accepting the prone position too--guess that makes me liberal. :beer:

[revelarts]

You are mistaking me for someone else. I stop talking to people who are abusive. I avoid people who have cruel streaks.
you've avoid half of my questions, and i've not been abusive AT ALL.
why are you avoiding me?





Death? J/K
I think I understand what you're getting at with the karma thing; be virtuous. Aristotle discussed this at length; where any reasoned action, if taken to the extreme (ie vices), would be morally unsound. Alternatively, to be virtuous, one should act in moderation. There was more, of course, such as one's function being well-defined and well-executed, but the tenet of moderation is central to Aristotelian ethics. Meaning, to go through life rallying for the fair treatment of animals, being sure none are harmed at all cost, say to the extreme that people starve-- it wouldn't be morally sound due to lack of moderation. But in defense of hunting; they get one tag/year; and often those are done by lottery, so not even that much. If you're talking about poachers or something, that's obviously a lack of moderation too.


Maybe its me being magnanimous, but I've always thought man's ability to reason right from wrong and act upon it separates us from 'nature' to a significant degree. This ability to rationalize gives us a powerful advantage over other species in the ecosystem; but with this power, comes responsibility.
Says who? Uncle Ben from Spiderman?

it's a question i've posed in various forms to Noir to Wind song and now you.

Aristotle said some very fine things but ..um.. who died and made him God?
His morals are pegged to a kind of pragmatism of a "life lived well" and "happiness". which one could argue that hunting makes some happy, it could fulfill another good of friendship. Or say that Women were ‘infertile males’. (The reason why the man dominates in society is his superior intelligence. Only the man is a full human being. “The relationship between the male and the female is by nature such that the male is higher, the female lower, that the male rules and the female is ruled.”)

All of these morals are pegs in mid air. they have no foundation. It's just a reasonable to say "...do what you will" which is a satanist and Wicca creed. (masonic too? )

it's an assertion without a base.
We know in our guts there are morals or right and wrong but is there a universal to explain it and we can make it binding on everyone?
Wind song seems to says it's Karma but Karma seems to be only handing out neg or pos reps that you never know the end of. However she won't tell me how she knows this is true. so far it's just an assertion.
Noir seems to say Revelarts your just wrong wrong wrong, God did not make morality. I'm not going to tell you where morals come from but i know they are there. i've got mine and that 's all i need at the moment.

[gabosaurus]

I don't like hunting and would never participate in such. But it is an established fact that herds of various animals have to be culled to assure their own survival.
Hunting and fishing have always existed as a way for men to feed their families. There are some who still do this.
Though I do agree with the concept of animal rights.

http://www.zbunjola.com/slike/animal-rights-500x411.jpg

[Missileman]

Maybe its me being magnanimous, but I've always thought man's ability to reason right from wrong and act upon it separates us from 'nature' to a significant degree. This ability to rationalize gives us a powerful advantage over other species in the ecosystem; but with this power, comes responsibility.

Eating for survival isn't a moral issue, it's a natural one and man's sense of morality doesn't negate our place in the food chain.

[DragonStryk72]

I'm not talking about Native Americans and you know it. I'm talking about the karma that is involved in taking life. Yes, I've heard all the arguments about hunting for food, and keeping deer populations down etc etc.

It doesn't take away from my argument.

And your thoughts on those arguments? What's your solution to deer overpopulation, if any? Do we just let them die horrificly, what?

You labeled all hunters, so yes you were talking about Native Americans as well. How is the deer less dead, less hunted, or less killed by them when they do it? Now, you're just being hypocritical.

It's fine if you don't believe in hunting, I don't hunt myself, aside from one time, but that was years ago. Not that I can't, I'm a deadshot, as my black ribbons will attest to, but that isn't really the point. I don't go around labeling all hunters as anything but hunters, but I'm curious to know why you feel the need to label so many people so judgmentally?

[logroller]

Says who? Uncle Ben from Spiderman?

it's a question i've posed in various forms to Noir to Wind song and now you.

Aristotle said some very fine things but ..um.. who died and made him God?
His morals are pegged to a kind of pragmatism of a "life lived well" and "happiness". which one could argue that hunting makes some happy, it could fulfill another good of friendship. Or say that Women were ‘infertile males’. (The reason why the man dominates in society is his superior intelligence. Only the man is a full human being. “The relationship between the male and the female is by nature such that the male is higher, the female lower, that the male rules and the female is ruled.”)

All of these morals are pegs in mid air. they have no foundation. It's just a reasonable to say "...do what you will" which is a satanist and Wicca creed. (masonic too? )

it's an assertion without a base.
We know in our guts there are morals or right and wrong but is there a universal to explain it and we can make it binding on everyone?
Wind song seems to says it's Karma but Karma seems to be only handing out neg or pos reps that you never know the end of. However she won't tell me how she knows this is true. so far it's just an assertion.
Noir seems to say Revelarts your just wrong wrong wrong, God did not make morality. I'm not going to tell you where morals come from but i know they are there. i've got mine and that 's all i need at the moment.
Oh unenlightened one.. Who made God God? I say Man did with reason; and unless you can show me proof of God before Man existed, again, without the use of reason -- then it is God who's foundation rests upon us, not the other way around. Bring on the stake; I'll pray for lightning.;)


Eating for survival isn't a moral issue, it's a natural one and man's sense of morality doesn't negate our place in the food chain. It could be. Say you're deserted on a boat and in order to survive you must eat other castaways?Are you saying there's no moral dilemma there? Would you wait until after they've expired, or kill the weakest, or fattest? I'd start with the vegan, love me that grain-fed meat...pass the spleen:laugh:

[Missileman]

Oh unenlightened one.. Who made God God? I say Man did with reason; and unless you can show me proof of God before Man existed, again, without the use of reason -- then it is God who's foundation rests upon us, not the other way around. Bring on the stake; I'll pray for lightning.;)

It could be. Say you're deserted on a boat and in order to survive you must eat other castaways?Are you saying there's no moral dilemma there? Would you wait until after they've expired, or kill the weakest, or fattest? I'd start with the vegan, love me that grain-fed meat...pass the spleen:laugh:

That's when nature and evolution kick in...survival of the fittest, not the fattest. If the fodder isn't dying fast enough, they might require nudging. :laugh2:

[LuvRPgrl]

Im in fAvor of Gun control -- especially the Isosceles stance...though I'm accepting the prone position too--guess that makes me liberal. :beer:

not sure if you are joking or not, the beer and all, but I only said that it makes her AT LEAST a supporter of liberals


Oh unenlightened one.. Who made God God? I say Man did with reason; and unless you can show me proof of God before Man existed, again, without the use of reason -- then it is God who's foundation rests upon us, not the other way around. Bring on the stake; I'll pray for lightning.;)g
nobody or nothing made God, God, and He has existed forever, we arent able to comprehend that though. There is plenty of proof to those with an open mind about the existence of God.




It could be. Say you're deserted on a boat and in order to survive you must eat other castaways?Are you saying there's no moral dilemma there? Would you wait until after they've expired, or kill the weakest, or fattest? I'd start with the vegan, love me that grain-fed meat...pass the spleen:laugh:I

ROFL,,,I prefer gizzards and hearts....

[Missileman]

There is plenty of proof to those with an open mind about the existence of God.
.

Start another thread and post it. I contend there's not a shred of evidence that there's a god.

[LuvRPgrl]

Start another thread and post it. I contend there's not a shred of evidence that there's a god.

Funny how you say its off topic and shouldnt be brought up here, and then you bring it up again

I wasnt talking to you about that anyways, but if you want another spanking, be my guest.,

AND, AND, IT IS GERMAIN TO THE TOPIC no god to many, means no morals hence hunting cant be "wrong".

LOGROLLER,,, ;you claim that there is no evidence that GOD MADE US, and you also claim man made god, since you are asking for proof from the opposistion for its statement, dont you also have the responsability to provide evidence that proves man made god?

[logroller]

Funny how you say its off topic and shouldnt be brought up here, and then you bring it up again

I wasnt talking to you about that anyways, but if you want another spanking, be my guest.,

AND, AND, IT IS GERMAIN TO THE TOPIC no god to many, means no morals hence hunting cant be "wrong".

LOGROLLER,,, ;you claim that there is no evidence that GOD MADE US, and you also claim man made god, since you are asking for proof from the opposistion for its statement, dont you also have the responsability to provide evidence that proves man made god?
Well I wasn't talking to you... Just kidding
I happen to believe in God, but I reason Him to exist. That's what I was responding to Rev about; as he claimed all morality rests on the foundation of a supreme being, and not mans own reasoned ability. I claimed that it would be impossible to believe in God without a reason for doing so-- and that absent tangible proof, one must use reason to claim His existence. Ergo, man reasoning Him ino existence. Its a bit like if a tree falls in a forest... I can reason that it makes a sound, but i cant prove it, becausi didnt hear it. Rev just went off on how mans reasoning on morality was flawed if it didn claim god as th foundation. And I believe that morality, and believing in God, have at their foundation man's reason-- the proverbial egg before the chicken, or is the other way around? No answers here luv, best I can do is help you find your own:cheers:

[Missileman]

Funny how you say its off topic and shouldnt be brought up here, and then you bring it up again

You're high...I never said any such thing...hell, I never even hinted at any such thing. You said there's lots of proof that there's a God. Rather than derail this thread about hunting, I challenged you to start another thread listing the "proof".


I wasnt talking to you about that anyways, but if you want another spanking, be my guest.,

AND, AND, IT IS GERMAIN TO THE TOPIC no god to many, means no morals hence hunting cant be "wrong".

LOGROLLER,,, ;you claim that there is no evidence that GOD MADE US, and you also claim man made god, since you are asking for proof from the opposistion for its statement, dont you also have the responsability to provide evidence that proves man made god?

Do you believe there's a Zeus who commanded a pantheon that ruled over the lives of the Greeks? Do you believe in the existence of Hera, Apollo, Athena, and the myriad of other gods that have been worshipped over the centuries by countless civilizations?

[Missileman]

Well I wasn't talking to you... Just kidding
I happen to believe in God, but I reason Him to exist. That's what I was responding to Rev about; as he claimed all morality rests on the foundation of a supreme being, and not mans own reasoned ability. I claimed that it would be impossible to believe in God without a reason for doing so-- and that absent tangible proof, one must use reason to claim His existence. Ergo, man reasoning Him ino existence. Its a bit like if a tree falls in a forest... I can reason that it makes a sound, but i cant prove it, becausi didnt hear it. Rev just went off on how mans reasoning on morality was flawed if it didn claim god as th foundation. And I believe that morality, and believing in God, have at their foundation man's reason-- the proverbial egg before the chicken, or is the other way around? No answers here luv, best I can do is help you find your own:cheers:

I've used reason to arrive at the opposite conclusion as it pertains to the existence of god. I don't believe morality and belief in a deity are co-dependent.

[Wind Song]

My neighbor hunts, but he's not able to do it now due to some health problems. Now he just shoots the deer that come in his backyard.

[Mr. P]

My neighbor hunts, but he's not able to do it now due to some health problems. Now he just shoots the deer that come in his backyard.

How far away from your house is your neighbor that shoots deer in his backyard?

[SassyLady]

Chef and author Georgia Pellegrini




In Roman mythology, the master of the hunt was the goddess Diana. She was praised for her strength, athletic grace, beauty, and hunting skills.

In Freemasonry, she was a symbol of sensibility and imagination, of poets and artists. Shrines were erected in her honor; stags followed her wherever she went; she ruled the forest and the moon.

I like to think that Diana’s influence has never entirely waned, that hunting was never just about men getting together in the woods. Hunting is for all of us, an extension of our being both humans and animals—our first work and craft, one of our original instincts.

Today I am entirely different than the girl and chef who set out four years ago to learn how to hunt a turkey (http://www.foxnews.com/topics/turkey.htm#r_src=ramp).

There are the obvious differences, such as the fact that I can shoot a deer through the heart without batting an eye, and then promptly take out the innards on the forest floor with only a pocketknife and my bare hands.

I can skin it and then run the knife along the contours of the muscle until it is broken down into manageable parts.

Then, if I want to, I can portion the meat into those elegant pieces we see neatly wrapped up in plastic in the grocery (http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/10/im-girl-and-hunt/?intcmp=obinsite#) store meat section, with no signs that it was ever a living thing. Except that for me, I will always know.

I will have looked my food in the eye and made a choice; I will have felt the warm innards in my hands as I pulled them out and laid them on the forest floor for the coyotes and the mountain lions to eat.



Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/03/10/im-girl-and-hunt/?intcmp=obinsite#ixzz1puvxlMq4



I am a more thoughtful eater, a more thoughtful chef, and a more awake human being.

[LuvRPgrl]

You're high...I never said any such thing...hell, I never even hinted at any such thing. You said there's lots of proof that there's a God. Rather than derail this thread about hunting, I challenged you to start another thread listing the "proof".?
GOOD GOD MAN, are you brain dead or what.
From your own post #139:

I contend there's not a shred of evidence that there's a god.



denying it is out and out a lie.


Do you believe there's a Zeus who commanded a pantheon that ruled over the lives of the Greeks? Do you believe in the existence of Hera, Apollo, Athena, and the myriad of other gods that have been worshipped over the centuries by countless civilizations?
worshipped by countless civilizations over centuries, SIMPLY NOT TRUE.


I've used reason to arrive at the opposite conclusion as it pertains to the existence of god. I don't believe morality and belief in a deity are co-dependent.

NO GOD = might makes right.

[logroller]

My neighbor hunts, but he's not able to do it now due to some health problems. Now he just shoots the deer that come in his backyard.
Whers the sport in that? I'd of atleast used a ball peen hammer:lol:

[Wind Song]

How far away from your house is your neighbor that shoots deer in his backyard?

Not sure. Some acreage.

[gabosaurus]

What does the existence of God have to do with hunting? :lame2:

[Missileman]

GOOD GOD MAN, are you brain dead or what.
From your own post #139:

I contend there's not a shred of evidence that there's a god.



denying it is out and out a lie.

Idiot...Read the 6 words that preceeded that statement and then explain how I stated the subject was off topic and then brought it up AGAIN in a single post.




worshipped by countless civilizations over centuries, SIMPLY NOT TRUE.

Learn to read...there has been a myriad of deities worshipped by countless civilizations over the centuries.




NO GOD = might makes right.

Nonsense!

[logroller]

What does the existence of God have to do with hunting? :lame2:

Ethics; its a conservative thing, you wouldn't understand.

[logroller]

Learn to read...there has been a myriad of deities worshipped by countless civilizations over the millennia.


Fixed that for ya!

[LuvRPgrl]

Idiot...Read the 6 words that preceeded that statement and then explain how I stated the subject was off topic and then brought it up AGAIN in a single post.





Learn to read...there has been a myriad of deities worshipped by countless civilizations over the centuries.





Nonsense!

yea, you said it was off topic, then finished with something about there is no god

those are all greek roman gods

[Missileman]

Fixed that for ya!

I was going to use millenia, but I was trying to stay within some folks limited language abilities. ;)

[Missileman]

yea, you said it was off topic, then finished with something about there is no god

those are all greek roman gods

The ones I listed by name are, but "myriad of other gods that have been worshipped over the centuries by countless civilizations" extends beyond the Greeks and Romans. The statement is and should be self-explanatory.

[LuvRPgrl]

The ones I listed by name are, but "myriad of other gods that have been worshipped over the centuries by countless civilizations" extends beyond the Greeks and Romans. The statement is and should be self-explanatory.


so,if there are so many of em, name some, like maybe 10-15 off the top of your head.

[Gaffer]

so,if there are so many of em, name some, like maybe 10-15 off the top of your head.


Jupiter
Odin
Thor
Apollo
Loki
Aphrodite
Hera
Neptune
Diana
Amaterasu
Izanami
Krishna
Aphrodite
Kali

Want more? There are hundreds of them.

http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_myth_gods_index.htm#h

[LuvRPgrl]

Jupiter
Odin
Thor
Apollo
Loki
Aphrodite
Hera
Neptune
Diana
Amaterasu
Izanami
Krishna
Aphrodite
Kali

Want more? There are hundreds of them.

http://ancienthistory.about.com/library/bl/bl_myth_gods_index.htm#h

ok, I should have been more clear, as mm claimed there are many that ARENT GREEK OR ROMAN GODS

And I wasnt asking you, I already knew you could

[Missileman]

ok, I should have been more clear, as mm claimed there are many that ARENT GREEK OR ROMAN GODS

And I wasnt asking you, I already knew you could

Quit ducking the question...do all of those other deities really exist?

[LuvRPgrl]

Quit ducking the question...do all of those other deities really exist??

I dont know, which dieties r uy talking bout?

does anybody today believe the greek and roman "gods" were real gods?

I dont think the romans or greeks believed it themselves.

[Mr. P]

?

I dont know, which dieties r uy talking bout?

does anybody today believe the greek and roman "gods" were real gods?

I dont think the romans or greeks believed it themselves.

Just admit you DON'T have proof and move on, man. So we can praise AND fear Pele! Damn it.

[LuvRPgrl]

Just admit you DON'T have proof and move on, man. So we can praise AND fear Pele! Damn it.

oh man, I cant stop pulling on mm's chain now,,,,:laugh:

just mention god, and he goes viral

[Missileman]

?

I dont know, which dieties r uy talking bout?

does anybody today believe the greek and roman "gods" were real gods?

I dont think the romans or greeks believed it themselves.

Which part of ALL is beyond your skill in English?

[Mr. P]

oh man, I cant stop pulling on mm's chain now,,,,:laugh:

just mention god, and he goes viral

Thinkin it was the other way around. I could be wrong but I don't think so.

[LuvRPgrl]

Thinkin it was the other way around. I could be wrong but I don't think so.

nah,,,cant yank my chain anymore, too old for that :laugh:

[logroller]

oh man, I cant stop pulling on mm's chain now,,,,:laugh:

just mention god, and he goes viral

viral?

[LuvRPgrl]

viral?

I've never seen it spelled.

[logroller]

I've never seen it spelled.

Viral usually implies something spreads exponentially; like when a youtube video goes from hundreds of views per day, then thousands/day, the tens of thousand/day etc...just not sure what you meant. How did MM go viral?

[fj1200]

Mental he goes, mayhaps?

[Missileman]

Mental he goes, mayhaps?

Really?

[LuvRPgrl]

Viral usually implies something spreads exponentially; like when a youtube video goes from hundreds of views per day, then thousands/day, the tens of thousand/day etc...just not sure what you meant. How did MM go viral?I''

I know what it means, I just dont know the spelling neccesarily

[LuvRPgrl]

Mental he goes, mayhaps?

I like your choice of words

[logroller]

I like your choice of words
Perhaps they'll go viral.

[logroller]

I've used reason to arrive at the opposite conclusion as it pertains to the existence of god. I don't believe morality and belief in a deity are co-dependent.
Nor do I. I find it pleasing that we can mutually arrive at a common sense of right and wrong, despite different paths. Dedicated a song to ya.. http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?9-What-are-you-listening-to-now&p=534398#post534398

[fj1200]

Really?

Just offering a suggestion as to the proper word, not making a judgement. :salute:

[revelarts]

While i was away seem this thread took an interesting turn.

Looks like Some Challeged Luv to prove there was a God.
people have done as much before .. takes awhile but .. like proving some presidents lied us into war some folks don't like the proof and use of reason that gets ya there. so to them it's not "real".

But I may have gotten folks on this track with a similar question that was never answered.
Where do Morals come from?
I could put it the same way as the question about God
Prove to me that there are Morals.

missle was talking about false gods and rattling off names, I could rattle off a list of false moral ideas that have been believed around the world as well.
Where do the ones we espouse now come from. Can you PROVE they are real. or exist at all?

You want morals without God, OK prove it.

[revelarts]

any response here?
no, so there is no reasoned or factual basic for morals that could be applied universally to all people?

Do we have blind faith in morals? Are morals made up by man as we go along? Are they made up by the alpha culture or rulers. Does every person have their own? Are you sure? can you prove it?

maybe some just missed the question?

Log, Noir, anyone?

[Noir]

Morals and gods are tricky ones, because it can not be 'proven' either way, though it most certainly can be argued both ways. As I have posted before there are two lines of thought, the 'with god anything is possible' and 'without god anything is possible' in their own ways both are true (though obviously uncompatable).

In any case, regardless of whether there is or is not a god, I think (but obv can't prove as a fact) that morals are mostly learned behaviour, however, there can be objective scientific morality, by which you can say that something is immoral (and again this would apply both with and without a god in the universe)

[revelarts]

Morals and gods are tricky ones, because it can not be 'proven' either way, though it most certainly can be argued both ways. As I have posted before there are two lines of thought, the 'with god anything is possible' and 'without god anything is possible' in their own ways both are true (though obviously uncompatable).

In any case, regardless of whether there is or is not a god, I think (but obv can't prove as a fact) that morals are mostly learned behaviour, however, there can be objective scientific morality, by which you can say that something is immoral (and again this would apply both with and without a god in the universe)
Sure I agree mostly, It seem pretty clear to me that, if there is no God given standard then there's No Standard that can be applied across the board at all. I believe humans have innate moral motions but they are not consistent. I thinks that's provable. Where that came from is another story.. God maybe. Some have argued evolution put it there.

But "objective scientific morality"
what do mean by that? Do you mean people agree on a set of morals and use that as a standard like the kelvin scale of temperature or latitude and longitude, weights and measures?

[revelarts]

Oh unenlightened one.. Who made God God? I say Man did with reason; and unless you can show me proof of God before Man existed, again, without the use of reason -- then it is God who's foundation rests upon us, not the other way around. Bring on the stake; I'll pray for lightning.;)



Log we can't even prove MAN exist without the use of reason. it's a flawed question.
You can't prove your mother existed before you without the use of reason. Does your mother's prior existence rest on the foundation of your reason? Or was she there before you ever came into being? Before you knew of the concept of mother? Reason helps us know reality it doesn't established or determine the facts we find with it.

[Dilloduck]

Sure I agree mostly, It seem pretty clear to me that, if there is no God given standard then there's No Standard that can be applied across the board at all. I believe humans have innate moral motions but they are not consistent. I thinks that's provable. Where that came from is another story.. God maybe. Some have argued evolution put it there.

But "objective scientific morality"
what do mean by that? Do you mean people agree on a set of morals and use that as a standard like the kelvin scale of temperature or latitude and longitude, weights and measures?

What are innate moral motions ?

[Noir]

Sure I agree mostly, It seem pretty clear to me that, if there is no God given standard then there's No Standard that can be applied across the board at all. I believe humans have innate moral motions but they are not consistent. I thinks that's provable. Where that came from is another story.. God maybe. Some have argued evolution put it there.

But "objective scientific morality"
what do mean by that? Do you mean people agree on a set of morals and use that as a standard like the kelvin scale of temperature or latitude and longitude, weights and measures?

What standards exactly do gods set? I mean, if for example, the good according to the Muslim texts exists, then one of the highest forms of moral deeds is killings yourself with as many non-believers as is possible, or murdering someone because they decide they no longer want to be a Muslim etc...

And by objective morality I would point to moral philosopher Sam Harris.

[revelarts]

What are innate moral motions ?

That people are born with a sense or template that some things are right or wrong morally.
In ever culture you find the idea of fairness or justice of good and evil and form a young age one of a kids loudest complaints is "that's not fair!" an appeal that they except a moral response to.

it seem to me that culture/society is laid onto that innate template and refines it... or not.

most kids have an initial negative reaction to killing even of a small animal, sometimes even insects. "it seems wrong".
In most adults you'll find it even in people who deny there are any morals, If you watch them long enough you'll find some place where they'll cry that's not fair. Even while they claim there cheating or lying is not wrong or isn't real.

But there have been more studies along this line lately too. But I 1st heard it outlined this way by a christian philosopher name Francis Schaeffer, ..phew.. long time ago..i borrowed the term "moral motions" from him.



“...The problem of our generation is a feeling of cosmic alienation, including the area of morals. Man has a feeling of moral motions, yet in the universe as it is, it is completely out of line with what is there....”
Francis Schaeffer, He Is There And He Is Not Silent (Wheaton: Tyndale, 1972) 23.

...man is distinguished from both animals and machines on the basis of his moral motions, his need for love, his fear of non-being and his longings for beauty and for meaning. Dr. Francis Schaeffer, Death in the City (Downers Grove, InterVarsity Press: 1969) 95
http://www.holytrinitynewrochelle.org/yourti103475.html



but here's part of an interesting secular piece on the moral life of babies

Not long ago, a team of researchers watched a 1-year-old boy take justice into his own hands. The boy had just seen a puppet show in which one puppet played with a ball while interacting with two other puppets. The center puppet would slide the ball to the puppet on the right, who would pass it back. And the center puppet would slide the ball to the puppet on the left . . . who would run away with it. Then the two puppets on the ends were brought down from the stage and set before the toddler. Each was placed next to a pile of treats. At this point, the toddler was asked to take a treat away from one puppet. Like most children in this situation, the boy took it from the pile of the “naughty” one. But this punishment wasn’t enough — he then leaned over and smacked the puppet in the head....
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/09/magazine/09babies-t.html?_r=1&emc=eta1

a sort of interesting secular article here that touches on the subject a few good comments there to
http://blog.practicalethics.ox.ac.uk/2010/06/a-universal-moral-code/

[Dilloduck]

I beleive morals are behaviors that are learned by children from their parents or caretakers.

http://listverse.com/2008/03/07/10-modern-cases-of-feral-children/

[revelarts]

I beleive morals are behaviors that are learned by children from their parents or caretakers.

http://listverse.com/2008/03/07/10-modern-cases-of-feral-children/
whoah,
very interesting link. incredible how imitative humans are.
But I wonder, if many of those are true,
it's almost impossible to tell if morals play into their thoughts or have an effect on their actions don't you think? How could you determine one way or another. It's obvious they are not living up to their intellectual capacities either, it does not mean they don't have innate human intellect. these seem to me cases where their extremes circumstances make poor test subjects/examples on this question.

[Dilloduck]

I think they are the perfect beings to determine if humans have innate morals. They are free of any nurture influence by humans with morals. No suggestions have been made to them by people as to how they should behave or feel. They only survived by imitating survival techniques of other living beings arounds them. No guilt-no shame.

[revelarts]

I think they are the perfect beings to determine if humans have innate morals. They are free of any nurture influence by humans with morals. No suggestions have been made to them by people as to how they should behave or feel. They only survived by imitating survival techniques of other living beings arounds them. No guilt-no shame.

But how can we know if they have No guilt or shame?

[Dilloduck]

But how do can we know if they have No guilt or shame?

We don't. That's why I asked earlier about the moral motions you described and I haven't seen enough evidence to know if feral humans express anything that could interpreted as emotion.

[revelarts]

We don't. That's why I asked earlier about the moral motions you described and I haven't seen enough evidence to know if feral humans express anything that could interpreted as emotion.

well, couple of things,

One of the things that seem common among these examples of feral humans is no language.
now that's interesting because it goes to the question human origins or the origins of human society.
Every group of humans we know anything about has a language of some kind. It is a Hardwired part of being HomoSapianSapian. it seems Unless we find a purely feral or amoral like society of somekind somewhere at sometime i think were kinda left only assuming that man is a blank moral slate. There is no society like that, that i know of. Language assumes some human contacts and all of the human societies that we know of have some morals of some kind.

And as far a individual feral humans go , we also know that many humans left in isolation often go mad. And the morals of a a person who's possibly a bit insane is not something I think we should use as a base here.

[Dilloduck]

well, couple of things,

One of the things that seem common among these examples of feral humans is no language.
now that's interesting because it goes to the question human origins or the origins of human society.
Every group of humans we know anything about has a language of some kind. It is a Hardwired part of being HomoSapianSapian. it seems Unless we find a purely feral or amoral like society of somekind somewhere at sometime i think were kinda left only assuming that man is a blank moral slate. There is no society like that, that i know of. Language assumes some human contacts and all of the human societies that we know of have some morals of some kind.

And as far a individual feral humans go , we also know that many humans left in isolation often go mad. And the morals of a a person who's possibly a bit insane is not something I think we should use as a base here.


Insane or feral humans have morals ? I figure morals are just the norms that groups of humans sort of set up as a means of getting along and thriving as a group.

[revelarts]

Insane or feral humans have morals ? I figure morals are just the norms that groups of humans sort of set up as a means of getting along and thriving as a group.
I guess we'll start to circle here,
that's the question, as you point out it's a hard to say if Feral humans have morals or not but they are the outliers of humanity. Basically All other humans that we know of DO. To ground the idea that humans are -at base- amoral on feral humans, considering just the 2 problems I mentioned, seems shaky.
And yes Humans are social creatures and if we were, at base, amoral it seems that there would be examples of societies that could have or can survive and thrive that way as well. Just as the feral humans and animals do. Animals get along and thrive without the help of morals, why would humans make them up in every culture we know of in all times in all places, unless they were innate?

[Dilloduck]

I guess we'll start to circle here,
that's the question, as you point out it's a hard to say if Feral humans have morals or not but they are the outliers of humanity. Basically All other humans that we know of DO. To ground the idea that humans are -at base- amoral on feral humans, considering just the 2 problems I mentioned, seems shaky.
And yes Humans are social creatures and if we were, at base, amoral it seems that there would be examples of societies that could have or can survive and thrive that way as well. Just as the feral humans and animals do. Animals get along and thrive without the help of morals, why would humans make them up in every culture we know of in all times in all places, unless they were innate?

Neccesity.
The survival instinct in most assuredly innate. Morals could be the rules that societies need so they all don't kill each other. Or they could be the rules societies need to that other societies don't impede or threaten their survival.

[Wind Song]

What does the existence of God have to do with hunting? :lame2:


Nothing. I suppose that some people might say that God provided animals for people to hunt and eat. That's part of the God lore. It doesn't prove the existence of God.

[tailfins]

Nothing. I suppose that some people might say that God provided animals for people to hunt and eat. That's part of the God lore. It doesn't prove the existence of God.

H0: God does not exists
H1: God does exists

Is there an H2? The next step is to write a case for H0 and a case for H1 and see which is strongest.

Of course in the lefty world it works like this:

H0: I'm right
H1: Throw a fit

Conclusion: No thought required.

[Wind Song]

H0: God does not exists
H1: God does exists

Is there an H2? The next step is to write a case for H0 and a case for H1 and see which is strongest.

Of course in the lefty world it works like this:

H0: I'm right
H1: Throw a fit

Conclusion: No thought required.


I'm curious. What motivated you to make the "leftie world" comment? What are you trying to get out of that?

[tailfins]

I'm curious. What motivated you to make the "leftie world" comment? What are you trying to get out of that?

Being so dismissive about God as to refer to it as "lore" shows a lack of thought. I ask those that dismiss God so easily where they get their basis on how they treat people? How they are feeling that day? If one has no basis on how they treat people, is it anything goes?

[Wind Song]

Being so dismissive about God as to refer to it as "lore" shows a lack of thought. I ask those that dismiss God so easily where they get their basis on how they treat people? How they are feeling that day? If one has no basis on how they treat people, is it anything goes?


There are plenty of good reasons that atheists treat fellow human beings well. My use of the term, "lore" was not intended to be offensive. The definition of the word, "lore" means:A body of traditions and knowledge on a subject or held by a particular group, typically passed from person to person by word of mouth.

I'm sorry if you feel offended by the term.

Aren't you the same guy that was making sarcastic comments about liberals? What kind of thought went into YOUR post?

[revelarts]

Neccesity.
The survival instinct in most assuredly innate. Morals could be the rules that societies need so they all don't kill each other. Or they could be the rules societies need to that other societies don't impede or threaten their survival.

Then your saying that HUMANS survival instinct is to be moral or is connected to morals or
is moral.
Which is a sideways route to get to what i was saying, that Humans DO have an innate moral sense.